The Qur’an vs. The Bible (Part I): Comparing Historical Claims
My personal copy of the Qur’an
Category: Non-fiction, religion, history, theology
Page Count: 446
Year of Publication: 2008 (Reprinted with corrections in 2016)
10-Word Summary: Angel Gabriel’s revelation of God’s words to the prophet Muhammad.
I’m currently on my third read through of the Bible—that is, reading the Bible from start to finish in one year or less. So, I'm already very familiar with what is in the holy books of both the Jews and the Christians. But I realized that I was still ignorant to what is in the most holy book of the Muslims: the Qur’an.
John Stuart Mill, the great defender of free speech in his book On Liberty, warned his readers of dead dogma: believing a claim to be true without thinking about it. Hence the importance of engaging those who disagree with us, hearing their side of the issue, understanding why they hold the views they do, and comparing them to our own.
So, I decided to use my winter vacation to follow Mill’s principle and read the Qur’an to engage with the prophet Muhammad’s manuscript for myself and to write a comparison of the Qur’an to the Bible. For reference, I read the Oxford World’s Classics edition of the Qur’an translated by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem pictured above. In this first part, I will compare the historical claims of both texts. In the second part, I will compare the ethics of both Jesus and Muhammad.
Historical Claims
There is a story written in the Bible about Gideon: one of the judges, or military leaders, of Israel before the monarchy was formed under King Saul. In the story, Gideon assembled an army to fight against the Midianites—enemies of Israel. But the army was too big, and God knew that if Gideon won the battle with a large army, then Gideon would think that his army had won the battle instead of God winning the battle for them. So, God gave instructions to Gideon to trim down his army's size. Here is the story as it is written in the Bible in Judges 7:5-7 from the King James Version:
So he brought down the people unto the water: and the Lord said unto Gideon, Every one that lappeth of the water with his tongue, as a dog lappeth, him shalt thou set by himself; likewise every one that boweth down upon his knees to drink. And the number of them that lapped, putting their hand to their mouth, were three hundred men: but all the rest of the people bowed down upon their knees to drink water. And the Lord said unto Gideon, By the three hundred men that lapped will I save you, and deliver the Midianites into thine hand: and let all the other people go every man unto his place.
So, Gideon’s army is cut to three hundred men. Keep in mind that the Bible is the primary source for this story and for the history of ancient Israel, this story in particular written around 550 BC.
Gideon and His Three Hundred
Credit: The Providence Lithograph Company, Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons
However, in the Qur’an 2:249-251, the prophet Muhammad gives a different version of the story that goes as follows:
When Talut set out with his forces, he said to them, 'God will test you with a river. Anyone who drinks from it will not belong with me, but anyone who refrains from tasting it will belong with me; if he scoops up just one handful [he will be excused].' But they all drank [deep] from it except for a few. When he crossed it [the river] with those who had kept faith, they said, 'We have no strength today against Goliath and his warriors.' But those who knew that they were going to meet their Lord said, 'How often a small force has defeated a large army with God's permission! God is with those who are steadfast.' And when they met Goliath and his warriors, they said, 'Our Lord, pour patience on us, make us stand firm, and help us against the disbelievers, and so with God's permission they defeated them. David killed Goliath, and God gave him sovereignty and wisdom and taught him what he pleased.
When I read this story for the first time in the Qur’an, I thought Talut was the Arabic name for Gideon given that God was testing his forces with a river. But Haleem clarifies in the footnotes that Talut is the Arabic name for Saul. Those familiar with the Bible know that the story of Saul's forces attacking Goliath and the Philistines doesn't happen until 1 Samuel 17. Gideon's story happens in Judges 7, and there is at least a two-hundred-year gap between both events.
King Saul
Credit: Ernst Josephson, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
So, what the prophet Muhammad did was combine the narratives of Gideon, where Gideon leads his army and cuts it down in size, with the narrative of King Saul, where Saul’s army marches against Goliath and the Philistines. He then gets rid of Gideon all together and replaces him with King Saul—or Talut as he is named in the Qur’an.
Hence, it’s clear that the Qur’an’s historical account of the story contradicts that of the historical account found in the Bible. The Qur’an claims that King Saul’s army was cut down in size to fight Goliath and his warriors, while the Bible claims that Gideon’s army was cut down in size to fight the Midianites. The question then becomes: Which account is correct?
Well, if the Bible is both the earliest and main sources for the history of ancient Israel, composed over one thousand years before the Qur’an, why would I, or anyone for that matter, accept the Qur'an’s historical account over that of the Bible’s? Given that the Qur'an’s historical accounts of ancient Israel weren’t written until the 600s AD, more than 1100 years after the events described in the Bible, shouldn’t the historical accounts of ancient Israel in the Qur’an match the accounts found in the Bible?
For example, right now we are in the year 2024. If I was to write about events that happened in the 800s, say I was writing the Carolingian Empire in Europe, wouldn’t you find it strange if I said that Henry II founded the Carolingian Empire? If you know your medieval European history, you know Henry II was a Holy Roman Emperor and not the founder of the Carolingian Empire—Charles Martel and Pepin the Short founded the Carolingian Empire. Wouldn’t it be much easier to say that I simply made a mistake and confused Henry II with Charles Martel or Pepin the Short, especially given the fact that I’m writing over 1100 years after the events I’m describing? I’m extending this same logic to the Qur’an and its account of Gideon and King Saul.
Nevertheless, a Muslim might respond with the following objection: "The Qur'an is the divinely revealed word of God, so it is the truest account of Israel’s history." The problem with this objection is that it falls prey to the fallacy of circular reasoning: If you're trying to prove to me, or any non-Muslim, that the Qur'an is the divinely revealed word of God, you can't use the conclusion of the argument, that the Qur'an is the divinely revealed word of God, to prove your point. For example, suppose I say to someone, "Joe Biden is a good president." Suppose the other person responds and asks, "Well, how do you know that?" and I respond with: "Because Joe Biden is a good president." That’s committing the fallacy of circular reasoning; I cannot use the conclusion of my argument as a premise (i.e. to prove my point).
A Muslim, therefore, would have to prove the Qur'an to be the more reliable account of the history of ancient Israel, even though it is written over one thousand years later than the events it describes and contradicts the original sources for these events. This, in my opinion, is too problematic.
Another objection a Muslim could raise is that King Saul simply did the same thing as Gideon and was tested in the same way, hence they are two separate historical events; the Qur’an, therefore, would not contradict the Bible because King Saul is performing a separate miracle altogether, though the same type as Gideon performed in the book of Judges. The problem with this objection is that it doesn’t make sense, and here’s why:
The reason Gideon’s army is cut down in size is because God wanted Gideon and his troops to acknowledge that God was the one who would bring them the victory against a larger army. However, in the story of David and Goliath, David fights a one-on-one battle with Goliath. Here is the biblical account as told in 1 Samuel 17:1-11 in the King James Version:
Now the Philistines gathered their forces for war…. Saul and the Israelites assembled and camped in the Valley of Elah and drew up their battle line to meet the Philistines…. The Philistines occupied one hill and the Israelites another, with the valley between them…. A champion named Goliath, who was from Gath, came out of the Philistine camp…. Goliath stood and shouted to the ranks of Israel, “Why do you come out and line up for battle? …. Choose a man and have him come down to me. If he is able to fight and kill me, we will become your subjects; but if I overcome him and kill him, you will become our subjects and serve us.” Then the Philistine said, “This day I defy the armies of Israel! Give me a man and let us fight each other.” On hearing the Philistine’s words, Saul and all the Israelites were dismayed and terrified.
Given that Goliath was looking for a one-on-one fight, and all the Israelites were dismayed and terrified, the miracle they were looking for rested on finding someone who would stand up to, and defeat, the champion of the Philistines. Thus, there would be no point in the Qur’an for King Saul to cut his army down to size because the miracle he needed at the time was in finding someone to stand up to, fight, and defeat Goliath—not in that of defeating an army of a greater size as in the story of Gideon. And this leads into another historical criticism I am leveling at the Qur’an.
David vs. Goliath
Credit: Osmar Schindler (1869-1927), Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
The three verses cited above in the Qur’an that refer to Talut going to fight against Goliath and his warriors are the only verses in the Qur’an that describe the battle against Goliath. As a matter of fact, the Qur’an doesn’t even acknowledge the fact that David killed Goliath in a one-on-one duel, or that David had no armor on, or that David was a shepherd with no military experience, or that no one believed David would win the battle.
But in the Bible, there is an entire chapter that describes this event. These fifty-eight verses detail who Goliath is, how the armies were aligned, the armor and weaponry that Goliath wore, what Goliath shouted to the Israelites, David’s courage and his desire to stand up to Goliath, David's decision to fight Goliath without King Saul's armor, David winning the battle with the help of the Lord, and so on.
In other words, the Bible is a lot more detailed, great for the historian, and great for the reader. One of the problems I had getting through the Qur'an was how little detail there was in the narratives, thus making the text a duller read in comparison to the history of ancient Israel found in the Bible.
But the history of ancient Israel was not the only portion of the Qur’an that made me skeptical of its historical claims. In the Qur’an 5:110, the prophet Muhammad relates the following story about Jesus:
God will say, 'Jesus, son of Mary! Remember My favor to you and to your mother: how I strengthened you with the holy spirit, so that you spoke to people in your infancy and as a grown man; how I taught you the Scripture and wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel; how, by my leave, you fashioned the shape of a bird out of clay, breathed into it, and it became, by My leave, a bird.
Jesus raises the clay birds of his playmates to life
Credit: Schaffhausen City Library, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
When I read this for the first time, I was drawn aback; those who have read the Gospels of the New Testament know that there is no story where Jesus makes a bird out of clay that then becomes a living bird. But after doing some research, I realized that story is found in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas: an account of the infancy and childhood of Jesus.
The problem with the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is that it was written in the late 100s, over one hundred years after the life of Jesus. There is also no multiple attestation for the event; that is, it's the only historical source that attests to the event. None of the Gospels or any of the eyewitnesses closer to the time of Jesus, such as his disciples or their disciples, attest to Jesus making a bird out of clay and bringing it to life. So, from a historical perspective, I can’t see how this would be a reliable source of information on the childhood of Jesus.
The prophet Muhammad most likely inserted this story because he was being informed on the Christian faith by heretical (i.e. non-Orthodox) Christians who lived outside of the Christian Byzantine Empire. Since these Christians read other gospel narratives and accepted them as authoritative, Muhammad most likely assumed that all Christians believed these stories were authoritative to all Christians as well.
And all this makes sense of the following passage in the Qur’an 5:73-76, where the prophet Muhammad makes the following claim:
Those people who say that God is the third of three are defying [the truth]: there is only One God. If they do not stop what they are saying, a painful punishment will afflict those of them who persist. Why do they not turn to God and ask His forgiveness, when God was most forgiving, most merciful? The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a messenger; other messengers had come and gone before him; his mother was a virtuous woman; both ate food [like other mortals]. See how clear We make these signs for them; see how deluded they are. Say, 'How can you worship something other than God, that has no power to do you harm or good? God alone is the All Hearing and All Knowing.
Here, Muhammad is referring to Orthodox Christians, Christians who believed that God consists of the Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and who lived predominantly in the Byzantine Empire and in western Europe. He claims that these trinitarians believe that Jesus is “the third of three.” Hence why Muhammad responds by saying that the Messiah “was only a messenger” and “ate food [like other mortals],” emphasizing the idea that Jesus was not divine but simply another messenger of God.
As a matter of fact, Muhammad believed that the Trinity consisted of God, Jesus, and Mary. Here is the prophet in his own words referencing what God will say to Jesus on Judgment Day:
When God says, ‘Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to people, “Take me and my mother as two gods alongside God”?’ he will say, ‘May you be exalted! I would never say what I had no right to say—if I had said any such thing You would have known it: You know all that is within me, though I do not know what is within You, You alone have full knowledge of things unseen—
From these passages, Muhammad emphasizes that there is no triune God that consists of God, Jesus, and Mary. But as a trinitarian myself, I was left scratching my head.
First, Jesus is not “the third of three.” He is the second person of the Trinity through which all things were created. As the apostle Paul writes in the epistle to the church of Colossians 1:12-17:
Giving thanks unto the Father… Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Second, I agree with the prophet Muhammad that the Trinity is not God, Jesus, and Mary. The Trinity is God the Father, the Lord Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I believe that Muhammad was misinformed by the non-Orthodox Christians that Mary was part of the Trinity because Orthodox Christians requested Mary’s intercession in prayer the same way Catholics do. For example, even today you hear many Protestants mistakenly claiming that Catholics pray to Mary because they consider her to be divine. Hence, Muhammad makes the same exact error and claimed that the Trinity included Mary and why he emphasizes in the Qur’an 5:75 that Mary was but “a virtuous woman” who “ate food [like other mortals],” emphasizing the idea that Mary was not divine.
The “Shield of Trinity”
Credit: AnonMoos, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Keep in mind that every word in the Qur'an is taken by Muslims to be the literal word of God as the angel Gabriel revealed it to the prophet Muhammad. So, if any part of the Qur’an is falsified, then the whole text is, therefore, falsified. And for all the reasons stated above, I find the Qur’an to be lacking in historical rigor and unacceptable as divine revelation.
